EDH, did you read my post that I linked to... the part where Roger called me on the phone and then hung up on me and so forth. There's a whole history here, and you need to know Dennis's background too.

There are people who committed to the project and put their hard work into the blogging that was supposed to lift the whole enterprise and did not. They did this for a couple thousand dollars a year. I'm not really patting myself on the back for being offended at an offer of maybe $3000 to blog under contract to them for 18 months. I was so revolted by the amount of money they thought they could buy my services for that I reflexively said no. The phone call was to inform me that I would be left behind as the big enterprise succeeded without me. That chance didn't make up for the low compensation and heavy-handed persuasion makes me -- a law professor-- suspicious. I chose to stay with BlogAds where my fate was in my own hands, but many good bloggers bit.

Ann Althouse said..."I was so revolted by the amount of money they thought they could buy my services for that I reflexively said no. The phone call was to inform me that I would be left behind as the big enterprise succeeded without me."

I have this image in mind of Rog jumping in the car, sticking his head out of the window, and yelling back at you, eyes ablaze, "Fine! Fuck you, you Berkeley House Whore! this car will get us there - you'll see! And we're going without you!" -- whereafter the car splutters to the end of the driveway, the engine dies, refuses to restart, and a fuming Roger sits in impotent rage and in fear of the imminent "I told you so" look.

The PJM founders and bloggers took a shot at the American Dream and came up short. No?

I don't fault anyone for trying except for the founders of U.S. Football League who thought Americans are sitting around in the spring and summers with nothing to do and so would flock to pay good money to see a football game. Now they were some dumbass idiots.

I hadn't delved into the comments section from your previous post where you made those revelations about your interactions with Roger Simon.

In no way did I mean to impute Dennis' "hostility" to you, because you haven't displayed any, only a streak of independence that is healthy, and presumably enhanced by choice in a competitive environment. Hence, my questions about the recriminations.

Take heart. Roger Simon came up in the movie business. From my experience, that kind of hegemonic treatment is routine in the agency world, and the way business is done in Hollywood. He probably doesn't even notice it after all these years, or he's projecting what he experienced on the other side of the negotiating table as a screen writer. In that mileau, power is exercised by convincing the other party that they are nothing, and that they will remain nothing unless they do what I want, on my budget, on my terms.

How did I receive my first ultimatum?

"You're playing with the big boys now, and you can be replaced."

When you hear that know the person telling you that has also been told that before, and so on all the way up. Shit rolls down hill.

In those situations, you need a objective and complete inventory of your strengths and weakeness. Sometimes it's just a tactical bluff.

I'm glad they are moving into PJTV in a more bigger way. It's so super exciting to watch writers look uncomfortable on camera while guests have a "what the F am I doing here" look plastered on their faces.

Roger looks great in that stupid hat and open collared pumpkin head Glenn and Stepford Dr. Helen are just mesmerizing playing ideological caricatures of Cooter and Daisy Duke. (It's still PC to make fun of white southern accents, no?) I'm sure they are nice, hardworking and smart people, however, that doesn't cut it.

How about that guy with the tiny head, huge body and K-Mart suit. He sure is a barrel of laughs.

It is so painful just to see the stills of these stiffs. Does anyone actually watch this dreck?

Yes, going all in on PJTV is a grand idea. Professional TV journalism and fake professional news are available for FREE online, so paying for amateur hour tryouts sounds like such a deal!

I think other bloggers were getting more from PJM than they did from BlogAds.

I guess you were expected to subsidize that, tovarisch!

Actually, what I'm getting from the various eulogies is that Simon was going for a sort of ideological purity. In particular, he wanted middle-of-the-road, inoffensive conservatism. Ace was probably as out-there as he could take (and Ace's edginess isn't really in his political stances).

Apart form that, I have no dog in the fight, so the PJM thing is of no meaning whatsoever. It's too inside baseball for me.

Yeah. Me too. The Chrysler LeBaron was a terrible car.

I feel like one of the "B" crowd in High School watching the "A" crowd (Cheerleaders and Football Captains) having a mysterious infighting episode. Interesting, but what does it mean to me. Not too much.

*shrugs and goes on to economics class to try to get that A that will enable me to hire the washed up cheerleader in the future*

If Roger and Charles took venture capital for the business (as I've read), they would be forced by their investors to concentrate not only on a viable business model, but also one with a lucrative exit strategy (buyout or IPO) within say five years.

Maybe they cooked up a vision like this: a political version of YouTube that Rupert Murdock would buy up for hundreds of millions of dollars.

Crazy, yes. But at least they can point to the YouTube guys (a "comparable") and say, "Hey, they did it, and we're at least as smart as them!"

On the flip side: maybe they just couldn't come up with any sort of business model/exit strategy involving text blogging, that their investors wouldn't laugh at.

In other words, venture capitalists would rather swing for a home run with a 1 in 10 chance, than settle for a modest, slow-growth single with a 1 in 2 chance.

All that having been said, it's a sign of desperation when a business radically adjusts its business model after blowing through a lot of venture capital.

In such cases, the result is usually a haircut for the founders and initial investors, or bankruptcy. Or haircut first, then bankruptcy.

Being new to blogmania, there is plenty I don't know about its early days; however it falls right into place that the Professor wasn't fooled. I congratulate you for remaining true to yourself fair lady.

Awhile back, I asked in the comments to a posting here (I forget where, and am too lazy to look) whether PJM had ever made any money, and I suggested its plan was more of a charity plan than a business plan. Looks like I was right.

If their "Joe the Plumber Goes to the Middle East" series is a view into their future, then don't expect much. They're pinning the Conservatism 2.0 on Joe Appeal -- I particularly enjoy the visuals on the ads for that. There are the normal, glossy head shots of Glenn Reynolds and Michelle Malkin, looking at the camera and smiling. Nothing out of the ordinary.

Then there's Joe. He's looking up and off at an angle, head tilted, eyes wide and mouth slightly open in what? wonderment? joy? I don't know. It's as cheesy as Poliwood gets.

I have never paid attention to ads on blogs. How does it work? Althouse: do you make money if I take out an ad on your site? If I don't do that, which I won't - I have nothing to advertise - but what about if I click on an ad on your site? What triggers the benefits to you?

"Althouse: do you make money if I take out an ad on your site? If I don't do that, which I won't - I have nothing to advertise - but what about if I click on an ad on your site? What triggers the benefits to you?"

I make money if an ad is bought, not from clicking on the ads, although the advertiser can see the click-through rate, so it might have some effect on future purchases if there's good click-through.

I also make money if you use the Amazon box in my sidebar. So if you had something that you were going to buy anyway, if you started there, I'd get a percentage, and you wouldn't pay any more for the item. So using the blog as a portal to Amazon is an easy, costless way to support the blog.

Also when a post links to something that's at Amazon, I set it up in a way that, if you were to buy the thing at that point, I would get a percentage. (And let me assure you that I would never recommend something in a post just so I could collect money that way. I always just write about what I would write about anyway.)

Roger L. Simon, "Actually that part of our business has been losing money from the beginning, so the people getting their quarterly checks from PJM were getting a form of stipend from us in the hopes that advertisers would start to cotton to blogs and we could possibly make a profit. Didn’t happen. No wonder those people are kicking and screaming now that they are off the dole. I might too. [What's their beef? I thought most of them were free marketeer libertarians or something.-ed. Go figure.]"

Classless. I can accept the explanation that their business plan didn't work as expected, and they had to cut an unprofitable venture, but the tone of the explanation is simply unacceptable. Is it so hard to say "Sorry this didn't work out. All the best in your future endeavors" rather than "Tough luck. Get over it, you undeserving whiners." Treating business partners as though they're unworthy recipients of your largesse is the sign of a true scumbag.

One more thing - I see some people are talking about how Roger L. Simon is some sort of Hollywood player, and this is how things are done in Hollywood. Only the latter part of that statement may be correct. Before he became a minor internet celebrity, Simon was a mildly successful, but largely unknown screenwriter who hadn't come up with much for years.

Yes, I know one of his screenplays won an Oscar around 20 years ago, and while that's all well and good, go watch an entertaining Quentin Tarantino knockoff called "Two Days in the Valley" about the Hollywood status of guys who wrote one Oscar-winning screenplay a long time ago. He's only a "Hollywood player" to the rubes. Otherwise, he's a schmuck who ran a largely unsuccessful internet venture that only survived because of the largesse of ideologically-motivated investors, and he was rude to Ann Althouse. Unimpressive!

Actually, one more one more thing. My comment about "He's only a "Hollywood player" to the rubes" wasn't aimed at anyone posting here. The rubes I'm referring to are the people who over the years have cited him as some sort of Hollywood player who should be listened to because of his status in that town and at those who make comments at his site that come off as being in awe of him as some sort of brave entertainment industry contrarian. I wasn't referring to anyone on this thread. Roger L. Simon's suckaciousness hasn't rubbed off on anyone here, as far as I can see.

I don't fault anyone for trying except for the founders of U.S. Football League who thought Americans are sitting around in the spring and summers with nothing to do and so would flock to pay good money to see a football game. Now they were some dumbass idiots.

The USFL's March-June schedule was actually a good draw. Major League Baseball was beginning it's slide at that point. It was when The Donald (owner of the Generals) and a couple of other fools decided to move to a fall schedule that the league went down the toilet.